Thanks Pasi, Tony - you generated both of those from the interop, so could you take a peek and let us know what you recall and/or think? (e.g. for 1378 do you prefer optional or REQUIRED?, for 1383 I guess if the interop showed that folks implement more generic wildcarding then the erratum is ok as-is).
Ta, S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In particular, my earlier email (two months ago) identified > two errata (1383 and 1378) that deserve a closer look: > > http://mipassoc.org/pipermail/ietf-dkim/2008q3/010664.html > > (For these two, I'd be hesitant to assume that silence > means everyone's OK with them.) > > Best regards, > Pasi > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ext >> Stephen Farrell >> Sent: 29 September, 2008 12:44 >> To: ietf-dkim >> Subject: [ietf-dkim] RFC 4871 errata >> >> >> Hi all, >> >> We need to give Pasi guidance on the WG's opinion of the >> various errata [1] that've been posted for RFC 4871. >> >> Most of these were generated as a result of the good interop >> work done earlier, so this should hopefully be easy. >> >> We need to tell Pasi if we think the errata as posted >> should be accepted and if so, whether the proposed >> change and accompanying notes are ok or not. If the >> text needs changing then we need to generate the new >> text required. (Since this could take some time, please >> don't try to e.g. polish the notes text so that its >> totally nice and shiny:-) >> >> If there are ones we need to discuss, please start >> a new thread for each. Once that's settled down, I'll >> send out a mail looking for some +1's on the entire set. >> (If no-one comments on any of them in two weeks, i.e. >> by 2008-10-13, then I'll send out that message >> anyway.) >> >> After that's all done, we'll want to think about whether >> to do a 4871bis with the changes or a delta or whatever, >> but that's for later. >> >> Thanks, >> Stephen. >> >> [1] http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4871&eid= >> _______________________________________________ >> NOTE WELL: This list operates according to >> http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html >> > _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
